Technology of the Gods: The Incredible Sciences of the Ancients

by David Hatcher Childress

  This would indicate that the Sphinx was already constructed by this time, and would make it easily the oldest structure in Egypt, built long before the recognized Egyptian civilization began. Suddenly, we are back to the tales of the ancient Osirian Empire, Atlantis, and the cataclysmic pole shifts that have rocked our planet every ten thousand years or so.

  The Sphinx is often said to be the likeness of the Pharaoh Chephren, of whom several statues, one in the form of a sphinx, were found upside down in the temple next to the sphinx. The sphinx, in fact, is said to have been recarved at least once, and its head is unnaturally small for its body, indicating that it once had a much larger head. Perhaps the Pharaoh Chephren had the Sphinx recarved in his likeness during his lifetime.

  The Valley Temple of Chephren next to the Sphinx is also an unusual structure. It is constructed of huge granite and limestone blocks weighing up to 100 tons apiece. No inscriptions of any kind are to be found in the temple, and the blocks are perfectly fitted together in a curious jigsaw pattern that interlocks the blocks. As has been noted previously, this is a trademark of “The Builders,” a type of megalithic construction that is not only extremely difficult to make, but also difficult to tear down. Because the blocks are interlocked, they cannot shear like bricks or square blocks of masonry. It is especially interesting to compare the construction technique found at the Valley Temple of Chephren to that found at Cuzco, Sacsayhuaman, Ollantaytambo and even Machu Picchu.

  There are also said to be secret passages beneath the Giza plateau. These passages go to the pyramids, allegedly starting from the Sphinx, and are part of the ancient Mystery Schools of Egypt. A strange shaft in the Giza plateau between the Pyramid of Chephren and the Sphinx is known as Campbell’s Tomb or Campbell’s Well. This shaft is now blocked by a grate, but one can still look down it. The shaft is about 15 feet square on each side and about a 100 feet deep. On each side of the walls, one can see numerous tunnels, passages and doors cut into the solid rock. These passageways are part of the tunnel system that goes beneath the Giza plateau. It is purposely dangerous to attempt to reach the pyramids or the secret underground rooms that can be found in the tunnels. Their existence, and what lies in them, is a matter of legend and prophecy.

  It has been suggested that a secret library from Atlantis is hidden somewhere inside, underneath or nearby the pyramids of Giza; this library is generally called the Ancient Hall of Records. According to some, the Hall of Records preserved ancient knowledge in the form of encoded quartz crystals, much like a hologram might be encoded by a laser today. Also in these secret chambers, sealed from the rest of mankind during the dark age of Egyptian history when the evil priesthoods sought to control mankind, are supposedly machines and devices from that forgotten age. There is the belief by some that the Ark of the Covenant was contained inside the Great Pyramid for some time, and then taken by Moses when the Israelites split for the Promised Land.

  The pyramids of the Giza Plateau have been recognized as feats of engineering wonder since time immemorial. Herodotus (the Greek historian of the 1st century BC) claims that he was told by priests two thousand years or more after the Great Pyramid’s construction that teams of ten thousand men each labored for ten years to build a ramp for the blocks; then another twenty years to build the pyramid; and finally a further ten years to put the casing stones on the pyramid starting from the top down. Herodotus claimed that Cheops financed the construction by having his own daughter work as a prostitute. An inscription read to Herodotus at the base of the pyramid by priests told of the number of onions and radishes it took to feed the laborers.

  Yet, it appears that Herodotus was being told a story. No trace of a ramp has actually been discovered. Most scholars believe that the ramp Herodotus refers to is the causeway leading up from the Nile, past the Sphinx. All the pyramids had this causeway leading up to them, but it apparently had nothing to do with their construction. There are no actual wall drawings of a pyramid being constructed, but there are drawings that portray the transport of gigantic obelisks and giant statues weighing more than a hundred tons by men pulling sleds.112

  According to John Anthony West, even though it was possible to muster up enough labor to build the pyramids over time, some sort of lifting device would have to have been employed, which so far no one has come up with. Other engineers claim that no lifting device was needed and that the ramp merely had to reach the top of the pyramid. However, a Danish engineer named P. Garde-Hanson has calculated that such a ramp would require seventeen and a half million cubic yards of material, seven times more than that used in the building of the pyramid itself! Garde-Hanson believes that a ramp going halfway up the pyramid would be better, but it would still be necessary to use a lifting device, which brings us back to the old problem.112

  The placing of the limestone casing stones, which weigh up to 10 tons or more, is an even bigger problem, as they are cut and fitted with such precision. Cheops did not even sign his own pyramid—the only marks in the pyramid are quarry marks on granite blocks on the inside of the pyramid. These were only discovered with the tearing apart of the pyramid, and were never meant to be seen.

  One possibility is the ingenious theory that the pyramid itself was a hydraulic pump, and the blocks were floated into place on rafts from nearby Lake Moeris. Another theory that has a certain attraction to mystics is that the blocks were levitated, using what the Egyptians called Ma-at, a force of mind power akin to the Sanskrit Mana power of the mind.

  Was the Great Pyramid Poured into Place?

  One curious theory of the pyramids is postulated by an authority on ancient construction techniques named Dr. Joseph Davidovits. Davidovits has been saying over the last several years that the Great Pyramid of Egypt, as well as other pyramids in Egypt, was not constructed out of cut stone as has always been assumed. Davidovits believes that the large blocks were actually poured into place, and that they are an advanced and ingenious form of synthetic stone that was cast on the spot like concrete.

  Davidovits reported on his research at a meeting of the American Chemical Society in the mid-1980s. He is the founder and director of the Institute for Applied Archaeological Sciences located near Miami. He is also the author of the 1988 book The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved.114Davidovits claims that a new deciphering of an ancient hieroglyphic text has provided some direct information about pyramid construction and that it supports his theory that synthetic stone was the construction material.

  The text, called the “Famine Stele,” was discovered 100 years ago on an island near Elephantine, Egypt. It consists of 2,600 hieroglyphs, about 650 of which have been interpreted as dealing with stone-fabrication techniques. The text claims that an Egyptian god gave the instructions for making synthetic stone to Pharaoh Zoser, who is said to have built the first pyramid in 2750 BC.

  Included were a list of 29 minerals that could be processed with crushed limestone and other natural aggregates into a synthetic stone for use in the building of temples and pyramids. Like the chemists of the 17th and 18th centuries, the Egyptians named these minerals according to their physical properties. The materials were called “onion ore,” “garlic ore” and “horseradish ore” because of their distinctive smells.

  Davidovits believes the minerals in the ores contained arsenic. Other ingredients for making synthetic stone—phosphates from bones or dung, Nile silt, limestone and quartz—were also readily available.

  According to the theory, the ingredients were mixed with water and placed into wooden forms similar to those used for concrete. Davidovits said the cement used in the pyramid stone binds the aggregate and other ingredients together chemically in a process similar to that involved in the formation of natural stone. Thus, pyramid stone is extremely difficult to distinguish from natural stone. Portland cement, by contrast, involves mechanical rather than molecular bonding of its ingredients. Also, “Egyptian cement” would last for thousands of years, while ordinary cement has an average life span of only 150 years. Organic
fibers, having accidentally fallen into the mixture, have been found in the stone blocks of the Great Pyramid, claims Davidovits.114

  What Was the Function of the Pyramids?

  Actually, though it is usually said that the pyramids were tombs for the pharaohs, the evidence is generally against this theory. Startling as it may seem, no Egyptian mummy was ever found in a pyramid. Many Egyptian mummies have been found, but not inside pyramids. Rather, they have been found in underground vaults and tunnels, such as those in the Valley of the Kings where Tutankhamen was found.

  As the normally traditional archaeologist Kurt Mendelssohn says in his book The Riddle of the Pyramids:111“While the funerary function of the pyramids cannot be doubted, it is rather more difficult to prove that the pharaohs were ever buried inside them...

  “Leaving out Zoser’s Step Pyramid, with its unique burial chambers, the nine remaining pyramids contain no more than three authentic sarcophagi. These are distributed over no fewer than fourteen tomb chambers. Petrie has shown that the lidless sarcophagus in the Khufu [Cheops] Pyramid had been put into the King’s Chamber before the latter was roofed over since it is too large to pass through the entrance passage... One would like to know what has happened to the missing sarcophagi. The robbers might have smashed their lids but they would hardly have taken the trouble to steal a smashed sarcophagus. In spite of careful search no chips of broken sarcophagi have been found in any of the pyramid passages or chambers. Moreover, it has to be remembered that from the Meidum pyramid onward the entrance was well above ground level. At the Bent Pyramid even the lower corridor is located 12 meters above the base and bringing a heavy sarcophagus in or out would have necessitated the use of a substantial ramp...

  “The fact that sarcophagi in the Khufu and Khafre [Chephren] pyramids were found empty is easily explained as the work of intruders, but the empty sarcophagi of Sekhemket, Queen Hetepheres and a third one in a shaft under the Step Pyramid, pose a different problem. They were all left undisturbed since early antiquity. As these were burials without a corpse, we are almost driven to the conclusion that something other than a human body may have been ritually entombed.

  “We have already referred to the fact that Snefru seems to have had two, or even three, large pyramids, and he can hardly have been buried in all of them...

  “While very few people will dispute that the pyramids had some connection with the afterlife of the pharaoh, the general statement that the pharaohs were buried in them is by no means undisputable...Quite possibly each pyramid once housed the body of pharaoh, but there also exists ...an unpleasantly large number of factors that speak against it. It is on the basis of these complexities and contradictions that Egyptologists had to try and find a solution to the most difficult problem of all: why were these immense pyramids built in the first place?”111

  If the pyramids weren’t tombs, what were they?

  There is the theory that they were astronomical observatories. Another idea is that the pyramids, especially the Great Pyramid, were geodetic markers and “time capsules” in the sense that higher knowledge, such as sophisticated geometry and mathematics were incorporated into the structures. Others have claimed that the pyramids were centers of initiation. Then, of course, there is always “pyramid energy.” The word “pyramid” is in fact Greek for “fire in the center.”

  The Giza Power Plant

  The belief that the pyramids were a device for tapping the energy of the Van Allen Belt, where the bulk of the pyramid served as a protective baffle, like insulation around an electric cable, is perhaps the most incredible suggestion of all. This theory is now championed by British engineer Christopher Dunn. Dunn is the author of the 1998 book The Giza Power Plant: Technologies of Ancient Egypt.98 In this book, Dunn outlines his theories, and gives evidence for advanced machining and engineering knowledge in ancient Egypt.

  Dunn claims that the Earth may be a giant power plant, and the many pyramids, obelisks, and megalithic standing stones may be part of this great “energy system.” He says that the Great Pyramid was a giant power plant and that harmonic resonators were housed in slots above the King’s Chamber. He also theorized that there was a hydrogen explosion inside the King’s Chamber that shut down the power plant’s operation.

  In August 1984, Analog magazine published Dunn’s article “Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt?” It was a study of the book Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh, written by Sir William Flinders Petrie. Dunn is convinced that sophisticated machining was used in certain cases. Says Dunn, “Since the article’s publication, I have visited Egypt twice, and with each visit I leave with more respect for the ancient pyramid builders. While in Egypt in 1986, I visited the Cairo museum and gave a copy of my article, along with a business card, to the director of the museum. He thanked me kindly, threw it in a drawer to join other sundry material, and turned away. Another Egyptologist led me to the ”tool room“ to educate me in the methods of the ancient masons by showing me a few cases that housed primitive copper tools. I asked my host about the cutting of granite, for this was the focus of my article. He explained that the ancient Egyptians cut a slot in the granite, inserted wooden wedges, and then soaked them with water. The wood swelled creating pressure that split the rock. Splitting rock is vastly different than machining it and he did not explain how copper implements were able to cut granite, but he was so enthusiastic with his dissertation that I did not interrupt. To prove his argument, he walked me over to a nearby travel agent encouraging me to buy airplane tickets to Aswan, where, he said, the evidence is clear. I must, he insisted, see the quarry marks there, as well as the unfinished obelisk.

  “Dutifully, I bought the tickets and arrived at Aswan the next day. After learning some of the Egyptian customs, I got the impression that this was not the first time that my Egyptologist friend had made that Quarry Marks at Aswan trip to the travel agent. The quarry marks I saw there did not satisfy me that the methods described were the only means by which the pyramid builders quarried their Drill Hole at Aswan rock. There is a large round hole drilled into the bedrock hillside, that measures approximately 12 inches in diameter and 3 feet deep that is located in the channel, which runs the length of the estimated 3,000 ton obelisk. The hole was drilled at an angle with the top intruding into the channel space. The ancients may have used drills to remove material from the perimeter of the obelisk, knocked out the webs between the holes, and then removed the cusps.”98

  Dunn says that archaeology is largely the study of history’s toolmak ers, and archaeologists understand a society’s level of advancement with tools and artifacts. The hammer was probably the first tool ever invented, and hammers have forged some elegant and beautiful artifacts. Ever since man first learned that he could effect profound changes in his environment by applying force with a reasonable degree of accuracy, the development of tools has been a continuous and fascinating aspect of human endeavor. Dunn says that the Great Pyramid leads a long list of artifacts that have been misunderstood and misinterpreted by archaeologists, who have promoted theories and methods that are based on a collection of tools that they struggle with to replicate the most simple aspects of the work.

  Says Dunn, “For the most part, primitive tools that are discovered are considered contemporaneous with the artifacts of the same period. Yet during this period in Egyptian history, artifacts were produced in prolific number with no tools surviving to explain their creation. The ancient Egyptians created artifacts that cannot be explained in simple terms. These tools do not fully represent the ‘state of the art’ that is evident in the artifacts. There are some intriguing objects that survived after this civilization, and in spite of its most visible and impressive monuments, we have only a sketchy understanding of the full scope of its technology. The tools displayed by Egyptologists as instruments for the creation of many of these incredible artifacts are physically incapable of reproducing them. After standing in awe before these engineering marvels, and then being shown a paltry collection of copper impl
ements in the tool case at the Cairo Museum, one comes away bemused and frustrated.”

  Dunn claims that the British Egyptologist Sir William Flinders Petrie also recognized that these tools were insufficient. He explored this anomaly thoroughly in Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh, and expressed amazement about the methods the ancient Egyptians used to cut hard igneous rocks. He credited them with methods that “...we are only now coming to understand.” 98

  Says Dunn, “I’m not an Egyptologist, I’m a technologist. I do not have much interest in who died when, whom they may have taken with them and where they went to. No lack of respect is intended for the mountain of work and the millions of hours of study conducted on this subject by intelligent scholars (professional and amateur), but my interest, thus my focus, is elsewhere. When I look at an artifact to investigate how it was manufactured, I am not concerned about its history or chronology. Having spent most of my career working with the machinery that actually creates modern artifacts, such as jet-engine components, I am able to analyze and determine how an artifact was created. I have also had training and experience in some non-conventional manufacturing methods, such as laser processing and electrical discharge machining. Having said that, I should state that contrary to some popular speculations, I have not seen evidence of laser for cutting on the Egyptian rocks. Still, there is evidence for other non-conventional machining methods, as well as more sophisticated, conventional type sawing, lathe and milling practices. Undoubtedly, some of the artifacts that Petrie was studying were produced using lathes. There is also evidence of clearly defined lathe tool marks on some ”sarcophagi“ lids. The Cairo Museum contains enough evidence that will prove that the ancient Egyptians used highly sophisticated manufacturing methods once it’s properly analyzed.